goonys evil twin

Actually, control has always been an issue for him. K/bb was good in 2005, but it's never been good in his career. He walked over 5/9 in the minors, and is over 4 in the majors. Perhaps he's solved his control issues, but more likely than not, walks will continue to be a problem for him. Unfortunately, Hendry doesn't have a problem with pitchers who walk a lot of guys.

no kidding.

I'm talking about what I think the Cubs should do. They should sign Giles, first and foremost. If they can fit in Furcal after that, fine. But Giles is the first priority. If Furcal goes back to Atlanta, the Braves suddenly have to cut elsewhere, then take Marcus off their hands, and you have a perfect situation to introduce Cedeno to the lineup.

They'd only have Perez at SS if they are stupid. If they sign Giles, they won't be stupid, so I wouldn't assume Perez at SS.

Sheffield would be a big disappointment in my opinion. He's angling for his last contract, and I don't want it with the Cubs. I'm still holding out hope based on the fact that the Cubs always seemed to fear Giles a lot when playing his teams, and they tend to look at Cubs killers from time to time.

That's the thing. As UK pointed out the Cubs are desperate for a leadoff guy and Furcal and/or Pierre seem to be the targets. Cedeno IMO isn't deemed as a leadoff guy by the Cubs and for some reason the non-scooting (UK again) abilities of Walker and Murton will not give them the chance toi hit at the top of the order. Giles would be wonderful but would he be worth getting if Baker has Perez leading off? The leadoff guy doesn't have to come from SS though. And this doesn't mean you can't pursue Furcal, just that given our resources, Giles should be our top priority. You're preaching to the choir CPatt. The one that makes the lineup thinks otherwise so I'm just saying what we are up against as Baker has certain hitters can only be certain things in that old school mind of his. I don't really like Pierre, but I'd much rather have Pierre, Giles, Lee, Ramirez........Cedeno, than Pierre, Furcal, Lee, Ramirez, (ball catching RF).

It's not a matter of decline, it's a matter of nowhere to go up. Furcal brings a 750 OPS to this team. He's not going to break out into an elite SS. He's going to give you good, but not great production from SS. Giles is going to give you great production from RF. He's going to give you a .400+ OBP, and away from Petco, still very good SLG (somewhere around .500). Furcal to me is a lot like some other young, extremely physically gifted, but not all that productive players of the recent past who rode the hype wagon to the bank with big money deals, ARod and Jeter set the high water mark for the position and showed just how much of a premium can be paid if you play SS and hit. Tejada signed the new saner version of the top dollar SS contract, while Nomar foolishly passed on his chance to do the same (luckily for Boston). Renteria and Cabrera signed the insanely overpriced 2nd tier SS deal for $8m/year, even though they weren't any more production than many others at the position. The team that pays more for Furcal will be paying that overinflated premium, without getting the benefits of actual production. Average SS production isn't that far below good SS production. The Cubs can get average SS production for nothing. Average RF production is far below good RF production. The Cubs are likely to not even get average production, assuming the list of names that have been mentioned for the spot is accurate.

It was 677, while the RF position was 746. Cedeno could probably crack 700, and could conceivably put the Cubs in the top half of SS production in the NL next year. Furcal would no doubt bring them higher, but SS is a pretty tight range of production. Nobody gets great production out of SS in the NL. 4 teams in all of baseball got an OPS over 800 from the position. On the other hand, half of MLB got an 800+ from RF. RF must be productive. The formula is Cedeno + Giles is far and away better than Furcal + (pick your piece of crap RF that Hendry thinks can catch the ball). Why not wrap up Giles now? Why is it "hoping for Giles" but not "hoping for Furcal". Right now it seems Hendry's plan is to hope Furcal doesn't resign with Atlanta. That approach has as much a chance for disaster as your "hope for Giles" theory. It's not about hoping, it's about filling needs with obvious and available talent. RF is the only position on this team that is an immediate need but does not have even one internal candidate who gives you a chance for average or better production. RF cannot be solved by second rate players. The problem is the people in charge of this team are too clueless to even understand that RF was a major disappointment last year. They think they were fine out there, and that somehow defense was the real reason they lost, as opposed to the two problems that were much much worse, first and foremost no OBP (again, Giles beats Furcal easily there), and secondly weak pitching.

I find it funny that you argue for Giles over Furcal because Furcal is past his prime. The difference is that Furcal was never great at his prime. His price is being driven up by the hype surrounding the theory that he is the best young position player in free agency. He's past his prime, but his prime wasn't all that special. Giles was an absolute stud in his prime, and still brings far more to the table now than Furcal. Furcal's unspectacular production (750 OPS) is being glossed over because of his defense and position. But I know one thing, adding a 750 OPS to this lineup isn't going to do much to solve the team's immense offensive woes, especially when the cost of adding that 750 OPS will likely force the Cubs to once again go mediocre, or worse, in the biggest need position on the team, RF. Giles, far and away, adds greater improvement to this team than Furcal does. The Cubs were 10th in the NL last year in SS production, and were just 011 points of OPS from being 6th in the NL. On the other hand, they ranked 15th in OPS from RF last year, and were 050 points from cracking the top 10, 077 from the top 6. Cedeno could easily provide them a chance to be at least average at SS next year. They have no similar fallback option for RF, and based on the many rumored names, they are likely to get no better than minimal improvement from the disaster that was Burnitz. The fact is they can afford to get both Furcal and Giles, and I'd be ecstatic if they did. But if there is only a chance for one, there is no debate that Giles would be the more helpful acquisition.

thats my vote. You want Hairston behind the two worst players on the team?

Giles would look great in the 2 hole. Let Atlanta resign and overpay Furcal (who has never been great and never will be), then help them offset the cost by taking the other Giles off their hands. Giles/Giles in the 1/2 slot would solve all of this team's offensive problems - except for the problem of Dusty being stupid enough to think Neifi needs playing time.

Once he's healthy that could be very very good, but Williamson would also have to be healthy, and the others would have to avoid implosion. That's pretty much a crapshoot bullpen with upside. There's no telling how SW or OD will pitch next season.

Mostly fine? He was freaking excellent. K/9 in excess of 13 K/BB in excess of 4 OPS against around 600 WHIP of 1.15 44/48 in s/opp

Sign another closer to close. If you offer Wagner or Ryan something around 3/30, they'll sign, regardless of Dempster's presence. You really think the Cubs would do that to Demspter? Trust him with a role. Watch him kick tail in that role. Reward him with a new contract to continue in that role. Then do a 180 on him? I'm sure Dempster is a pro, and would take it in stride, but I don't see Hendry as that type of GM. Well no, I don't think Hendry is going to do what's best for the team, so I wouldn't expect him to do this. But this wouldn't be "doing anything to" Dempster. They're still paying him, and he still gets to pitch. It's the team's fault if they're dumb enough to get caught up in who gets credit for the actual save. Pitching is pitching and the Cubs need it. Ozzie didn't have a problem switching out closers whenever possible. He had a guy with a 2.00 ERA and replaced him with an unproven kid. Dempster had a nice save % and total, but that's why they went hard after Alfonseca before. The team would be better with Dempster and Ryan/Wagner/Guardado than they'd be with Dempster and another mediocre reliever.

and despite what the myth makers in the press would like us to believe, they relied heavily on the homerun to get them where they are. BbB makes a great point about the lack of truly craptaculiar hitters. They were upper half in the league in OBP from the 1/2 spots. They had one crappy position, LF, compared to the Cubs who stunk it up across the board in the OF, and were at the bottom in SS until Nomar returned. But above all it was about great pitching, and they got career years out of multiple guys, including Politte who went from a near 6 ERA in Toronto to a 2.01 this year, and Hermanson who sucked in SF but had a 2.04 this year and Cotts who went from 5+ last year to 1+ this year. And something they did not do was walk a lot of guys as a staff.

Sign another closer to close. If you offer Wagner or Ryan something around 3/30, they'll sign, regardless of Dempster's presence.

That is one of the most inaccurate things I've ever read. Schilling openly said he would not go to Boston. Epstein did something Jim Hendry has never thought about doing, he actively and heavily recruited a star player who had made it clear he didn't want to play for his team.

they were lucky in the sense that everything worked out for the best for them this year. Record in 1 run games is not something that carries over from year to year, and some of their pitchers will regress a bit. It was their year, they deserved everything they got, but I would never choose to model my team after them, leaving so much to chance. They could be just a few over .500 next year without losing much.

what is the point/benefit of IM? I've seen it when using somebody else's AOL and don't understand why people would want it. It seems to be only slightly less annoying than those stupid walkie-talkie phones that allow people to pester you non-stop.

It'll take much more than a tweak. The problems that have plagued this team, have plagued them for years and are not being exaggerated. The Cubs were 9th in runs scored this year. They were that low because of low OBP, and the low OBP was because they took few walks. It would take 1 or 2 bats to turn things around if those 1 or 2 were big impacts like Giles. But things will not be fixed with Furcal and a mediocre RF. They need impact out there. No matter what you do with the pitching staff, there's no way to guarantee a top 1 or 2 staff, with the fragile nature of that aspect of the game. You can't put all your emphasis on pitching and just think this offense will get fixed with tweaks. They've been tweaking it for 3 years and it just keeps getting worse. They were 23 runs out of 6th and 36 out of 5th. Replace Neifi/Patterson @ the top of the order w/ Furcal and replace Floyd w/ Burnitz, and they should be able to get into the top 6. Get some hits w/ runners on base for a change and they can be top 5. Weren't they near the bottom in hitting w/ RISP?? Burnitz needs to go!! There is no way to go out and acquire AVG with RISP. It's not something that carries over from year to year. They need to get production, plain and simple. It doesn't matter how far they were from being 5th or 6th, they weren't 5th or 6th. Year after year they fail to rank high in runs and it's always because they fail to recognize the importance of having their hitters work counts and take walks. Lack of OBP has been the problem and it has to be addressed. If Hendry simply "tweaks" this offense, he's committing malpractice.

Gotta love people telling others whether or not they are true fans.

Lofton was brought to the Yankees to help smooth the transition of Bernie out of CF, but Lofton was awful out there. He is not good defensively anymore. 1 year at $6m for Cameron does not come close to the money that Damon will reportedly get. It's a very weak comparison. Cameron got a $3m signing bonus, and there is a $7m club option for 2007, with a $0.5m buyout. According to this site (I've found that site to be much better than ESPN when talking about contracts) his salary in 2005 and 2006 is $6m. Regardless, whether you call it $6m, $6.5m (counting the '07 buyout) or $7m, he's not terribly overpaid, and it's only 1 year, not the 4-5 Damon will get, and not anything close to a bad contract.

I'm comfortable with Dempster and either Ryan or Wagner on the same team. And I'd consider giving Guardado the same deal Dempster got. That's a solid 1/2 combo.

Cameron is an everyday CF with a good glove, Lofton is a platoon player who can't play defense anymore. what does cameron have to offer except defense? is it his lifetime obp of .340 , his lifetime slugging of .442 or his lifetime ba of .249 that makes him worth 7 mil a year? talk about a horrendous contract! i would take a platoon of jhjr & lofton over cameron any day. I think Cameron may be a little overpriced, but he's only got one year, left, so you can't say he's got a horrendous contract. He is not good in the OBP department, but he isn't a drag either, and in CF he'd be an enormous OBP improvement over 2005. He is by no means a top target in my book, but he's perfectly suitable to fill-in at CF for the season. I think Lofton is likely to fall back to the .340-.350 range for OBP in 2006, at his age and with his flukish resurgence in AVG last season. If they went big in RF and pitching, then I don't think Lofton/Hairston would be an awful idea, on the cheap, but neither comes close to Cameron's defense and I think his overall production will be greater than the two of them combined. *Oh, and according to the information I see, Cameron makes $6m in 2006, not $7m.

Cameron is an everyday CF with a good glove, Lofton is a platoon player who can't play defense anymore.